[link lost in import: /:80/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp]
All that story really does is confuse matters more.
Try this one:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9590-6126379.html
-Larry
"PlowBoy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:Aq5Zg.8305$eZ4.969@dukeread06...
> http://www.winsupersite.com:80/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp
>
"PlowBoy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:Aq5Zg.8305$eZ4.969@dukeread06...
> http://www.winsupersite.com:80/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp
>
A snippet -
"As a side note, I should add something since this argument is widely
misunderstood. Would it be "better" if Windows were licensed to an
individual? Sure, but that's not reality. The important thing to remember is
that, with Vista, this device-based emphasis has not changed. Windows is, as
always, not licensed to an individual. It's licensed to a device. One
device."
Even though I have been aware of this for about 12 months (since I have
been running a 2nd HT machine), I still cannot believe the greedy
unreasonableness of this. What a fucking hide! Looks like Bill Gates is
determined to use the world as a Kevorkian suicide machine. Seems like poor
old Bill must have little to live for.
I'd say a family with 3 kids, each with their own computer, plus a
general computer plus a HT box would be becoming commonplace in a lot of
homes. So that's 5 lots of XP/Vista you need to fork out for. Just nuts!
"Byron Forbes" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4535247a$0
> I'd say a family with 3 kids, each with their own computer, plus a
> general computer plus a HT box would be becoming commonplace in a lot of
> homes. So that's 5 lots of XP/Vista you need to fork out for. Just nuts!
That fits to my common sense - each individual operating system install does
need its own license. That also applies to games and other software as well.
What bugs me is that if you uninstall MS Vista, dismantle the computer, then
build a new computer, you cannot use the same Vista license that was in the
previous computer. With XP license, you can uninstall and reinstall on a
different machine as many times as you like (or at least the license terms
can very easily be read that way). With Vista license, you can only do this
once. What happens is that if Microsoft decides to refuse the product
activation after the reactivation, there will be a big problem. If, on the
other hand, Vista does still activate and work properly, it won't be a
problem for an end user - or perhaps a small moral issue, if the user has
read the license agreement at all.
If the worst happens, it will be a pain in the ass for frequent computer
upgraders. And it will also be difficult to sell old computer parts, as you
will be forced to sell the previous Vista license, complete with almost all
the hardware (relevant to product activation routines), to finance your new
Vista license for the new computer. A clever way to get people buying new
hardware that they wouldn't really need but must upgrade/change because of
the Vista license....
I sure hope Microsoft will not be too greedy by limiting the amount of times
the license is activated. I'm sure they are already monitoring it, though.
And I'm sure they are watching how many different machine/hardware
signatures are concurrently using the same Product ID in Windows Update....
--
Mika Takala
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 01:01:37 +0300, Mika Takala wrote:
> I sure hope Microsoft will not be too greedy by limiting the amount of times
> the license is activated. I'm sure they are already monitoring it, though.
> And I'm sure they are watching how many different machine/hardware
> signatures are concurrently using the same Product ID in Windows Update....
>
Microsoft deserves to be ignored on this issue alone ;-)
Cheers, uwe
--
GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61
The workarounds will be available for the taking, undoubtedly, if you so
desire.
The history trend of windows security will continue as it always has.
"Byron Forbes" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:4535247a$0$4670$[email hidden]...
